Post BF Upgrade Feedback - Click Here

Remove this Banner Ad

Relocation within Melbourne?

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Kwality said:
That move is accessibility, nothing to do with the experience.
Click to expand...
Accessibility is first and foremost definitely, but to say game day experience had nothing to do with it is quite a big call. The AFL themselves even mention the game experience being a factor
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

thegreig said:
Accessibility is first and foremost definitely, but to say game day experience had nothing to do with it is quite a big call. The AFL themselves even mention the game experience being a factor
Click to expand...

Yes the AFL do lots of things & the experience for the h&a season generally is spin, thats why market gimmickry more usually in Melbourne ...
 
The_Reaper said:
Guess the Giants should play their home games at the SCG then
Click to expand...
I'd argue that the Giants would get bigger crowds if their ground was in Parramatta CBD next to Bankwest Stadium. The issue with your attempt at sarcasm is that Greater Sydney has two CBDs, and GWS were specifically designed to appeal to an area containing the second CBD.
 
Bunk Moreland said:
Yes well done. Pull out one game for one of the clubs I mentioned.
Click to expand...
Your exact words were "Teams like St Kilda, North and Melbourne aren’t going to draw good crowds against interstate opposition at the G or Docklands". I gave you an example of precisely this happening, and you've decided to shift the goalposts. What their present crowds are isn't the most relevant thing anyway. The key question is, are their crowds going to be bigger somewhere else in Melbourne? And if so, where? It has to be somewhere easily reachable for their whole fanbase, and the problem is that there are very few places in the east of Melbourne that are well connected to every other part of the east. At least until the Suburban Rail Loop is built. Then some options might open up. But even that can only do so much on its own, there needs to be more.

And St Kilda’s last year at Waverley, against interstate opposition? Exact same median. 22k. We’re talking 21 years ago, when Melbourne had 1.7m less in population, at a falling down stadium with no public transport.
Click to expand...
And now there is no stadium and still no public transport. Who is going to make the necessary investment? There hasn't been a new railway line in the east in that whole time IIRC, and there won't be until the SRL is built. On top of that, traffic has become a lot worse.

Not to mention how they lose money with such small crowds at the G and Docklands.
Click to expand...
That's an issue of renegotiating the stadium deal, not the fact they're playing centrally. Again, it'll cost a lot of money to build a new ground with no certainty that crowds will be larger in the suburbs. Who is going to make that investment?

The local govts are rolling in cash given their huge rates base
Click to expand...
So what? Are they willing to spend that cash on professional sports teams? I raised the idea some time back of Melbourne moving their training base to Glen Iris or somewhere else close to their fanbase, and I was told that open spaces are hard to come by and local governments would rather save them for community facilities. How is it different with a stadium that will cost much more?

and as I’ve said, the state govt had shown multiple times they’ll spend on sport.
Click to expand...
Not all sport. Only sport in marginal electorates which are already a fair distance from existing examples of the same sport. If you can identify a specific marginal electorate in Melbourne where people have stated they'd rather have local professional sport rather than faster buses or more schools, I'd be very interested to hear where it is.

You seem obsessed with “suburban” examples but we’re in uncharted territory here.
Click to expand...
Except we're not, we had suburban stadiums until the 90s. You even gave an example of one above. They didn't work for a reason, the transport infrastructure simply isn't there.

‘Melbourne’ has never had a sprawl like this and such a massive decentralised population. Of course the govts would listen to the case if there could be money and votes in it.
Click to expand...
Of course they would. But, that's a big if. My experiences of suburban people is that they're more keen for public transport funding or schools than they are for stadiums near them, but I'm open to being corrected if I'm wrong.

Now all of that being said, there is one place in Melbourne that I think could be a good option for suburban relocation: sending the Bulldogs back to Western Oval. The problem is, that area isn't marginal politically, it's an incredibly solid area for Labor at every level of government. There's no government incentive to spend there.
 
Last edited:
Johnny Bananas said:
I'd argue that the Giants would get bigger crowds if their ground was in Parramatta CBD next to Bankwest Stadium. The issue with your attempt at sarcasm is that Greater Sydney has two CBDs, and GWS were specifically designed to appeal to an area containing the second CBD.
Click to expand...

Its not sarcasm.

In this scenario the club would be aiming specifically at the south east of Melbourne.
 
Gigantor said:
Yes, it is soccer, a smidgeon above the A-League in quality (mayber), but despite how many aussie soccer fans like to talk it up (not sure why), on the American sporting landscape, the biggest professional sports market on Earth, it is absolutely puny.
In fact, more Mexicans than Americans watch broacasts of games, and MLS' TV deal is a fraction of that of the AFL's.
Click to expand...

MLS is definitely better than the A-League. 32-year-old hasbeens instead of 37-year-old hasbeens.
 
Johnny Bananas said:
Your exact words were "Teams like St Kilda, North and Melbourne aren’t going to draw good crowds against interstate opposition at the G or Docklands". I gave you an example of precisely this happening, and you've decided to shift the goalposts. What their present crowds are isn't the most relevant thing anyway. The key question is, are their crowds going to be bigger somewhere else in Melbourne? And if so, where? It has to be somewhere easily reachable for their whole fanbase, and the problem is that there are very few places in the east of Melbourne that are well connected to every other part of the east. At least until the Suburban Rail Loop is built. Then some options might open up. But even that can only do so much on its own, there needs to be more.
Click to expand...

Yep, using actual data (median over three years) is certainly “shifting the goalposts” as opposed to pulling a single game out of my rectum.

Thank you for telling me what my exact words were, I hadn’t realised. You’re really good at this “conversation” thing.
 
Bunk Moreland said:
Yep, using actual data (median over three years) is certainly “shifting the goalposts” as opposed to pulling a single game out of my rectum.

Thank you for telling me what my exact words were, I hadn’t realised. You’re really good at this “conversation” thing.
Click to expand...
There's no need to be nasty and yet you're choosing to act that way, fascinating. I wasn't aware that a game played at the MCG was in my rectum, but I guess we learn something every day.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Bunk Moreland said:
If this situation pushes a club like St Kilda even further into debt, I can’t imagine any options are off the table.

Say they could get 15k into a redeveloped Frankston Park etc, initially for a few games a year. You’d have to look at it financially.
Click to expand...

Can they pay the interest in Oct, in Nov?
 
Purely on the economics of the game in the longer term (5-10 years) it’s obvious Melbourne won’t be able to support 9 teams plus 1 in Geelong. I can understand 4-5 but anymore is starting to stretch it. My choices would be:
North merge with Gold Coast (Northern Kangaroos)
Western Bulldogs merge with GWS (Western Sydney Bulldogs)
St Kilda off to Tasmania (Tassie Saints)
Melbourne long term maybe Canberra. As the Coronavirus pandemic has highlighted the AFL has been heavily propping up too many clubs (both in Melbourne and northern states). 16 clubs improves the standards, more supporters for the remaining Melbourne clubs and better balance nationally. Awaiting for the criticism 😂
 
JOHNNY GASTEV said:
Purely on the economics of the game in the longer term (5-10 years) it’s obvious Melbourne won’t be able to support 9 teams plus 1 in Geelong. I can understand 4-5 but anymore is starting to stretch it. My choices would be:
North merge with Gold Coast (Northern Kangaroos)
Western Bulldogs merge with GWS (Western Sydney Bulldogs)
St Kilda off to Tasmania (Tassie Saints)
Melbourne long term maybe Canberra. As the Coronavirus pandemic has highlighted the AFL has been heavily propping up too many clubs (both in Melbourne and northern states). 16 clubs improves the standards, more supporters for the remaining Melbourne clubs and better balance nationally. Awaiting for the criticism 😂
Click to expand...

It's a big jump in logic to go from Melbourne not being able to support 10 teams (which itself is debateable), to Melbourne only having 4 to 5 teams.
The latter being completely wrong.
 
Gigantor said:
It's a big jump in logic to go from Melbourne not being able to support 10 teams (which itself is debateable), to Melbourne only having 4 to 5 teams.
The latter being completely wrong.
Click to expand...

It’s an interesting discussion and I think one that is very relevant to this overall topic.

I think Vic can support 10 clubs - it has a population of 6.4 million and is growing faster than most other parts of the country. There’s 150 - 200k people being added per year.

But is our current model taking advantage of that? I don’t think it is.

Because make no mistake, we currently have these ten clubs:

Geelong, Melbourne Bombers, Melbourne Blues, Melbourne Bulldogs, Melbourne Demons, Melbourne Hawks, Melbourne Kangaroos, Melbourne Magpies, Melbourne Saints and Melbourne Tigers.

Is that set up best to deal with and engage the population? I dont think it is at all.

We have 9 CBD based clubs, this was set up in the 80s and 90s when Melbourne was a very different place, there is now an enormous population that is extremely spread out.

I think there are riches there for a club that is prepared to have a long-term crack.
 
Bunk Moreland said:
We have 9 CBD based clubs, this was set up in the 80s and 90s when Melbourne was a very different place, there is now an enormous population that is extremely spread out.
Click to expand...

That set up is a hangover from the 1930s, its true of the SA & WA local comps too. By the 80s the geographic spread in all cities had changed.

John Elliott, Dick Seddon & others recognised the weakness in the early 80s. Perhaps The Wookie can post a link to his web page, for anyone dismissive of those discussions/the time frame.

We will never have a fair national comp with so many teams in Melbourne.

Surely we wont miss this opportunity to rebuild a model reflecting 2030 not 1930.
 
JOHNNY GASTEV said:
Purely on the economics of the game in the longer term (5-10 years) it’s obvious Melbourne won’t be able to support 9 teams plus 1 in Geelong. I can understand 4-5 but anymore is starting to stretch it. My choices would be:
North merge with Gold Coast (Northern Kangaroos)
Western Bulldogs merge with GWS (Western Sydney Bulldogs)
St Kilda off to Tasmania (Tassie Saints)
Melbourne long term maybe Canberra. As the Coronavirus pandemic has highlighted the AFL has been heavily propping up too many clubs (both in Melbourne and northern states). 16 clubs improves the standards, more supporters for the remaining Melbourne clubs and better balance nationally. Awaiting for the criticism 😂
Click to expand...

The Bulldogs suprisingly are one of only six clubs that are still financially solvent (and just one of four in Victoria)

www.theage.com.au

Western Bulldogs among the six clubs to go it alone

In a remarkable turn of events, the Western Bulldogs will be one of at least six AFL clubs who draw on their own funds to survive, outside of player payments, during the game’s financial crisis.
www.theage.com.au www.theage.com.au

That said, Adelaide and the Western Bulldogs can only carry losses until August with only West Coast, Hawthorn, Collingwood and Richmond in a position to carry 12-18 months of losses.

If the Bulldogs can survive without assistance long enough they have a massive opportunity to spread west and north / westward
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Hawkk said:
The Bulldogs suprisingly are one of only six clubs that are still financially solvent (and just one of four in Victoria)

www.theage.com.au

Western Bulldogs among the six clubs to go it alone

In a remarkable turn of events, the Western Bulldogs will be one of at least six AFL clubs who draw on their own funds to survive, outside of player payments, during the game’s financial crisis.
www.theage.com.au www.theage.com.au

That said, Adelaide and the Western Bulldogs can only carry losses until August with only West Coast, Hawthorn, Collingwood and Richmond in a position to carry 12-18 months of losses.

If the Bulldogs can survive without assistance long enough they have a massive opportunity to spread west and north / westward
Click to expand...

They’re the only club which has truly started it with Ballarat.

Let’s be clear... if you want to proclaim to represent a region, you have to play there. Anything else (like any of the Melbourne clubs still representing any particular part of Melbourne) is bullshit.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom